From: Arkadiy Vertleyb (vertleyb_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-15 15:08:59
"Thore Karlsen" <sid_at_[hidden]> wrote
> You seem to be reading this differently than I am. To me it looks like
> he's saying that he has one thread that accepts connections, and then he
> passes the socket to a worker thread where he does all the synchronous
> reading and writing to service the client.
> He may have the threads already standing by when he accepts new
> connections, but since he's doing synchronous I/O he can't service more
> than one connection at a time from a thread. Thus the number of
> connections he can handle is limited by the number of threads he has,
> which is why there's a scalability problem.
"He" is not arguing with the fact that it seems possible to achieve somewhat
better scalability using asynchronous calls. "He" just doesn't like the
fact that this would mean writing the processing algorithm in a specific way
to suite the needs of asynchronicity. And "he" generally believes in
separation of concerns, so "he" doesn't want his processing algorithm to
know that it is used from the networked environment.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk